End of Project evaluation: Pilot Project to Support Socio-Economic Development of Rural Areas in the DPRK (SED)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2011-2019, DPR Korea
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
10/2019
Completion Date:
10/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

See attached

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR_SED_23May2019.pdf tor English 8844.44 KB Posted 107
Download document DPRK_SED_TerminalEvaluation_Report_Oct2019.pdf report English 2008.72 KB Posted 148
Download document DPRK_SED_TerminalEvaluation_Summary_Oct2019.pdf summary English 301.58 KB Posted 54
Title End of Project evaluation: Pilot Project to Support Socio-Economic Development of Rural Areas in the DPRK (SED)
Atlas Project Number: 00074805
Evaluation Plan: 2011-2019, DPR Korea
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 10/2019
Planned End Date: 10/2019
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.1.2 Marginalised groups, particularly the poor, women, people with disabilities and displaced are empowered to gain universal access to basic services and financial and non-financial assets to build productive capacities and benefit from sustainable livelihoods and jobs
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,000
Source of Funding: TRAC
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 25,400
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Jeff Fang SED Evaluator jeff@icmac.asia
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: DPRK -DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Lessons
1.

Conclusion #1: Significant External Factors/Challenges Severely Affected the Project

 

Significant external factors/challenges beyond the control of the UNDP DPRK CO were encountered throughout the entire SED project implementation, and severely affected the timely delivery of project outputs and eventual achievement of results.

 

In particular, the evaluation highlights below the 3 external factors/challenges as the main constraints.

 

  1. 6 Rounds of UN Sanctions on DPRK (2016-2017)
  2. Extended Period of Banking Channel Disruptions/Closure
  3. Lengthy negotiation and clearance process for the partnership agreement between UNDP and UNIDO

     

    Lesson Learned:

     

  1. The SED Project in its entirety demonstrated a need for:
  • long-term scenario planning together with annual reviews for change of direction to form part of risk assessment and mitigations in special country context projects.
  • organizational policies and procedures should also be continuously reviewed and updated, if necessary, to resolve and minimize issues in the event of changing unforeseen circumstances

 

  1. Implementing the SED Project without a concluded partnership agreement resulted in the significant delays to commencing project activities and the inability to deliver the desired results. 

     

    This also caused potential economic hardship/losses and productivity/job losses to the 3 counties who were understandably frustrated and disappointed by the prolonged delay of the partnership agreement, which was only finalized 2.5 years after the commencement of the SED Project.

     

    Partnership agreements with clear roles and responsibilities should therefore be concluded before commencement of any projects.

     

    Conclusion #2: The UNDP SED Project Team Has Done Their Best But There is Room For Improvement

 

The SED Project Team has done their best to implement the project despite encountering the significant external factors/challenges beyond the control of the UNDP DPRK CO throughout the entire SED Project. However, improvements could still be further strengthened in the following areas:

  1. Continuous monitoring on the use of delivered items and assets in full operations and production to determine actual result
  2. Field data collection to measure effectiveness and impact on completed project activities
  3. For improved financial accountability and transparency purposes, future financial reporting of UNDP DPRK projects should track and report progress of consistent financial figures i.e. budget and actual expenditure for consistent comparisons between budget and actual expenditure, as per project outputs, based on project CDRs, for submissions of all relevant project reports (including annual progress reports), to demonstrate the efficient use of funding on project output-based activities.

     

     

     

    Lesson Learned:

     

    To maintain sustainability and determine any project output/activity effectiveness and impact, even after any formal hand-over and/or completion of project output technical support and assistance, it is important that project teams, during the project duration period, still  continue monitoring and reporting on post project initiatives, including the use of the assets and delivered equipment items after handover to project beneficiaries. This would ensure that they are still in sustainable/good working condition when in full operation and in full production to determine the expected impact results.

     

    For improved financial accountability and transparency purposes, financial reporting processes should be consistent, especially on the tracking and reporting of financial figures (budget and actual expenditure) and consistent comparisons between budget and actual expenditure to demonstrate the efficient use of funding on project output-based activities.

     

    Conclusion #3: Strong National Ownership is the Key to Overcome Any Difficulties Faced and Achieve Optimum Results

     

    An important result demonstrated in the SED Project was how the intended project outputs address country priorities and also fit within the county development priorities with new strategies and initiatives being planned for sustainable living and livelihoods. This was further strengthened with strong support and commitment from DPRK National/Local Counterparts.

     

    The high level of national and local ownership for the Pistia Centre and Spirulina Centres in Unchon and Unryul Counties (South Hwanghae Province) ensured sustainability and positive environmental impact, despite the SED Project encountering external challenges that severely constrained the project beneficiaries.

     

    Lesson Learned:

     

    Strong national ownership through strong support and commitment, accompanied by capacity building and climate change adaptation activities, would play an essential key role to overcome any difficulties faced and achieve optimum results.


Findings
1.

The SED PRODOC indicated that the earliest commencement of the SED Project formulation was a joint UNDP/UNIDO fact-finding mission (led by UNIDO) in May 2011. As one of the “firstgeneration” UNDP DPRK projects since the re-opening of the UNDP DPRK CO in 2009, the UNDP DPRK identified a UNIDO expert to develop the SED Project according to the needs and priorities and constraints at the local province/county level in DPRK.


Tag: Ownership Programme/Project Design Project and Programme management Country Government

2.

The project took extensive consideration to stakeholder participation in project design, decision making, planning, implementation and monitoring. For example, the National Counterparts (MoLI, CSoST, CBS) and Local Counterparts (CPCs in Unryul, Unchon and Hoechang Counties) were invited to contribute to designing of project interventions and technical discussions on the output activities. This translated to an increase in confidence and ownership of project activities in the SED Project implementation.


Tag: Local Governance Ownership Programme/Project Design Results-Based Management

3.

The SED PRODOC had appropriate risk assessments with impact and probability ratings, and prepared corresponding counter-measures/management responses which were appropriate at that point of time and for the project duration (2013 to 2016). The SED Project identified a total of 7 risks: • 1 security/political risk • 3 operational risks • 1 environmental risk • 2 technical risks


Tag: Results-Based Management Risk Management

4.

3.1.4 Lessons from Other Relevant Projects Incorporated into Project Design The evaluation did not find substantive evidence of lessons from other relevant projects being considered and taken directly to support the SED Project design.


However, the evaluation observed that the SED Project Team took opportunity to align the SED Project with two UNDP DPRK projects that were concurrently implemented to maximize the agile delivery and adaptability of lessons learnt and knowledge derived. The two UNDP DPRK projects are:

• ‘Strengthening the Resilience of Communities through Community-based Disaster Risk Management’ Project (CBDRM Project)

• ‘Sustainable Energy Solutions for Rural Livelihoods’ Project (SES Project) One example of this alignment was the SED Project Team learned key lessons from the SES Project to develop innovative energy solutions such as Solar PV Panels to provide sustainable and reliable energy supply to the Spirulina and Pistia Centres in Unryul and Unchon Counties (South Hwanghae Province).


Tag: Renewable energy Knowledge management

5.

3.1.5 Planned Stakeholder Participation The SED Project generated strong stakeholder interest, especially at the DPRK national/central government ministries and Local Counterparts such as CPCs, CNTDAs and STSs in Unchon, Unryul and Hoechang Counties.

In terms of project design, the proxy indicators would be the number of stakeholders involved in planning and attendance during the project formulation/planning meetings. The evaluation interviews with National and Local Counterparts indicated sufficient evidence of direct involvement based on detailed accounts of the project outputs.

The minutes of the PSC meetings recorded perfect attendance and representations from the National Counterparts. The proxy indicators from M&E Field Monitoring Visits for participation at the project implementation stage indicated high project output ownership, perfect attendance at project field site meetings, capacity development/knowledge dissemination activities, and the visible evidence of construction/installation taking place. During the evaluation interviews, there were high levels of project output-ownership as the Local Counterparts and beneficiaries were able to provide extensive technical details of their project outputs.


Tag: Knowledge management Programme/Project Design Civil Societies and NGOs

6.

3.1.6 Replication Approach Replication and up-scaling are fundamental to the SED Project as it provides the opportunity to build on best practices and lessons learned, and expand the reach and impact of its project outputs. As such, UNDP, government agencies and the private sector would utilize these given opportunities to support the replication and up-scaling of the most successful projects and practices through their networks and contacts.


Tag: Sustainability Food Security

7.


The evaluation reviewed that PSC decisions in relation to the SED Project were effective and adhered to standards that ensure efficiency, cost effectiveness, transparency, effective institutional coordination, and harmony with overall priorities of the Government of DPRK and UNDP.


Tag: Implementation Modality Country Government

8.

Despite the early and recurring setbacks, the evaluation reviewed that the SED Project Team displayed good project management abilities and effectively utilised appropriate project management tools to implement the SED Project to the best of their abilities.


Tag: Project and Programme management

9.

There was evidence of strong interest and commitment at the local county level with the signing of the Exchange of Letter documents between UNDP DPRK, MoLI and CPCs of Unchon, Unryul and Hoechang Counties on the stakeholder contributions (both financial and in-kind), roles and responsibilities to implement the SED Project Activities.


Tag: Country Government UN Agencies UN Country Team

10.

However, the evaluation reviewed that there were inconsistencies (and inconsistent templates) in the SED Project Team’s financial reporting processes due to different reporting requirements given.


Tag: Operational Efficiency Project and Programme management

11.

However, the M&E process at the project level by the SED Project Team could be further improved in 2 key areas:
1. Continuous monitoring on the use of delivered items and assets in full operations and production to determine actual result Even though the procurement of various project outputs were completed and the items and assets delivered to the project beneficiaries, the SED Project Team should continue monitoring the use of delivered items and assets in full operations and production to determine the actual results and performance.

 


Tag: Monitoring and Evaluation Sustainability

12.

2. Field data collection to measure effectiveness and impact on completed project activities
There is a need for the SED Project Team to collect data to measure the effectiveness and impact on completed project activities.


Tag: Effectiveness Impact Monitoring and Evaluation Sustainability

13.

The evaluation established that there were strong working relationships between the UNDP DPRK CO, the SED Project Team and National/Local Counterparts and project beneficiaries at the county level. These working relationships were frequently tested by the slow progress of the SED Project. Key representatives of the National/Local Counterparts expressed numerous disappointments at the prolonged delays and unsuccessful implementation of the SED Project.


Tag: Implementation Modality Country Government UN Agencies UN Country Team

14.

The evaluation observed that:

• all outputs (1.1, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1) that UNIDO was fully responsible for as stated in the LOA did not deliver and achieve the desired project results and hence received the lowest rating
• all outputs (1.2, 1.3, 3.2) that UNDP was fully responsible for as stated in the LOA had higher ratings with notable achievements.

The evaluation further noted that UNDP had done its best to deliver and achieve the desired project results despite encountering significant external factors/challenges, mainly due to the 6 UN Sanctions in 2016 and 2017 and the recurring banking channel disruption/closure that prevented funds transfer into DPRK) during the SED Project duration.


Tag: Impact Results-Based Management

15.

While the SED PRODOC appropriately addressed the problems/needs identified and collectively presented a comprehensive solution to strengthen the national and local capacity for improved nutrition and food security, the evaluation reviewed that SED Project was too comprehensive and ambitious with 130 activities, comprising mainly complex technical design specifications, procurement of complex technical equipment and materials, and customized installation and construction to local requirements over the initial 3-year project duration


Tag: Relevance Knowledge management Programme/Project Design

16.

Due to external factors/environment beyond the control of the SED Project team severely affected the desired project results. Hence the SED Project did not fully achieve the intended outcome. Out of the 7 project outputs: • 5 outputs (1.1, 1.2, 2.2, 2.2, 3.1) were not fully effective • 2 outputs (1.3 and 3.2) were substantively effective


Tag: Effectiveness Monitoring and Evaluation

17.

3.3.4 Efficiency Achievement Rating: 2/6 (Unsatisfactory – Major Shortcomings)
The SED Project initially had an approved funding of US$4,328,309 for a duration of 3 years (June 2013 – July 2016). External unforeseen circumstances (mainly the UN Sanctions and the continuous banking channel closure) gave rise to the need for the SED Project’s time extension (approved by UNDP HQ) to July 2018 and a justified increased project funding to US$5,240,309.


Tag: Efficiency

18.

3.3.5 National Ownership Achievement Rating: 5/6 (Satisfactory – Minor Shortcomings)
While the SED PRODOC did not allocate any DPRK counterparts to lead in implementing any project outputs, strong national ownership was achieved at the National/Central level through perfect attendance by DPRK counterpart representatives (NCC-UNDP, MoLI, CBS and SCoST) of all PSC meetings.


Tag: Ownership Country Government Capacity Building

19.

3.3.6 Sustainability Sustainability Rating: 2/4 (Moderately Unlikely - Significant Risks)
The SED Project encountered unanticipated sustainability issues during project implementation such as the: • UN Sanctions which severely affected international and in-country procurement of equipment and materials to complete the revitalization of food processing and daily necessities factories
• banking channel disruption/closure which affected funds from being transferred into DPRK to implement many of the project outputs


Tag: Sustainability Implementation Modality Risk Management

20.

Despite the above major setbacks encountered, the basic human needs were potentially achieved through concrete examples of how the Spirulina and Pistia Centres considered the needs of women and young children.


Tag: Agriculture Livestock Nutrition Inclusive economic growth

Recommendations
1

Develop PRODOCS that take into close consideration the issues faced in special country context like DPRK

PRODOCs should be developed to mitigate issues faced in special country context with the following governance framework: • Partnership arrangements and the governance modality should be simplified and appropriately led by UNDP with an agency partner or technical working/advisory group (preferably with in-country office presence) to minimize partnership complications. If any partnership agreement is required, this should be concluded with clear roles and responsibilities for accountability purposes, signed and attached as an annex to the signed PRODOC before the commencement of any projects.
• Any technical design specifications/requirements should be appropriately identified and formulated during the fact-finding mission prior to developing the PRODOC.

2

Improve financial reporting processes

For improved financial accountability and transparency purposes, UNDP DPRK CO should improve their project financial reporting processes to track and report progress of consistent financial figures i.e. budget and actual expenditure for consistent comparisons between budget and actual expenditure, as per project outputs, based on project CDRs, for submissions of all relevant project reports (including annual progress reports), to demonstrate the efficient use of funding on project output-based activities.
Current project progress reports only contain a CDR as an annex which does not provide a clear picture for comparison of output / activity based progress / expenditures against the plan / budget.

3

Review and update extensively the country office policies and procedures with long-term scenario planning

Numerous external factors/challenges occurred in the period of 2013-2018 which severely constrained the UNDP DPRK CO in successfully delivering the desired results. It is therefore recommended that the UNDP DPRK CO should: R3.1) work with UNDP Regional HQ to extensively review and update all operational, procurement and financial management policies and procedures to account for all that happened within the 2013-2018 period and appropriately mitigate any future constraints
R3.2) incorporate extensive long-term scenario planning processes with appropriate risk assessments and counter-measures to ensure that suitable policies and procedures can be implemented to resolve and minimize issues in the event of unforeseen circumstances

4

Develop a robust M&E system at project level

R4: Developing a robust M&E system at project level
The UNDP DPRK CO should develop a robust M&E system at project level with effective monitoring and accountability mechanisms to: • collect and report real/reliable data during project implementation, including field implementation visits as follow up to programme field monitoring visits, in order to show the results achieved and the impact.
• continuously monitor and report in the project annual reports on the use of the assets and delivered items, after handover to project beneficiaries, to see the full operation/production in its entirety and also to determine the expected impact results.

5

Develop and implement a Sustainable Production and Consumption Supply Chain e.g. for the Pistia and Spirulina production and wild fruits processing

 

The pilot projects in producing Pistia and Spirulina, together with the potential to produce wild fruits, have the potential to be replicated and upscaled to other provinces within DPRK to improve nutrition and food security. They further demonstrated the need for continuity to enable a complete agriculture/food supply chain for sustainable production and consumption.
In line with the UN SDG #12 (Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns) which significantly focuses on “operating on supply chain, involving everyone from producer to final consumer”6, it is recommended that: R5.1) future UNDP DPRK projects should develop and complete the full agriculture/food supply chain, incorporating climate change adaption/resilience capabilities to overcome severe climate change conditions, to upscale and fully commercialize the production of agricultural and food products for increased nutrition and food security in DPRK
R5.2) UNDP DPRK CO should facilitate knowledge/operational transfer of successful pilot projects (Pistia and Spirulina Centers as key examples) with procedural, operational and hands-on training manuals should be replicated in close partnership with National/Local Counterparts

6

Build capacity continuously in sustainable agriculture, farming and food production practices

To further improve nutrition and food security, any future projects in DPRK should continue to include capacity building activities at local county and village (Ri) levels such as developing and implementing: R6.1) foundational and advanced hands-on/practical courses in sustainable agriculture, farming and food production practices to overcome and adapt to severe climate change
R6.2) gender mainstreaming activities to assess the capacity needs according to gender requirements, and foundational and advanced hands-on/practical courses specifically relating to enhancing gender equality and improving the women’s living and livelihood standards
R6.3) train-the-trainer courses to transfer knowledge gained from the courses in R6.1 and R6.2 to national/local research institutes, technology and dissemination centres, and vocational skills training schools to increase the training impact in other provinces/counties in DPRK.
R6.4) study tours for increased exposure to acquiring knowledge in global trends and best practices in other countries of similar context and/or culture to DPRK

1. Recommendation:

Develop PRODOCS that take into close consideration the issues faced in special country context like DPRK

PRODOCs should be developed to mitigate issues faced in special country context with the following governance framework: • Partnership arrangements and the governance modality should be simplified and appropriately led by UNDP with an agency partner or technical working/advisory group (preferably with in-country office presence) to minimize partnership complications. If any partnership agreement is required, this should be concluded with clear roles and responsibilities for accountability purposes, signed and attached as an annex to the signed PRODOC before the commencement of any projects.
• Any technical design specifications/requirements should be appropriately identified and formulated during the fact-finding mission prior to developing the PRODOC.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1 Simplify partnership arrangements and the governance modality appropriately led by UNDP with an agency partner or technical working/advisory group (preferably with in-country office presence) to minimize partnership complications. If any partnership agreement is required, this will be concluded with clear roles and responsibilities for accountability purposes, signed and attached as an annex to the signed PRODOC before the commencement of any projects.
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, BRH 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
1.2 Appropriately identify and initially formulate technical design specifications/requirements during the fact-finding mission prior to developing the PRODOC.
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, BRH 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
2. Recommendation:

Improve financial reporting processes

For improved financial accountability and transparency purposes, UNDP DPRK CO should improve their project financial reporting processes to track and report progress of consistent financial figures i.e. budget and actual expenditure for consistent comparisons between budget and actual expenditure, as per project outputs, based on project CDRs, for submissions of all relevant project reports (including annual progress reports), to demonstrate the efficient use of funding on project output-based activities.
Current project progress reports only contain a CDR as an annex which does not provide a clear picture for comparison of output / activity based progress / expenditures against the plan / budget.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 Report consistent financial figures for comparisons of actual expenditures versus planned budget as per project outputs in submissions of all important reports, to demonstrate the efficient use of funding as well as financial accountability and transparency.
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, project team 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
3. Recommendation:

Review and update extensively the country office policies and procedures with long-term scenario planning

Numerous external factors/challenges occurred in the period of 2013-2018 which severely constrained the UNDP DPRK CO in successfully delivering the desired results. It is therefore recommended that the UNDP DPRK CO should: R3.1) work with UNDP Regional HQ to extensively review and update all operational, procurement and financial management policies and procedures to account for all that happened within the 2013-2018 period and appropriately mitigate any future constraints
R3.2) incorporate extensive long-term scenario planning processes with appropriate risk assessments and counter-measures to ensure that suitable policies and procedures can be implemented to resolve and minimize issues in the event of unforeseen circumstances

Management Response: [Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 Work with RBAP and BRH to extensively review and update all operational, procurement and financial management policies and procedures responding to the changed situations for appropriately mitigating any future constraints
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, BRH, RBAP 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
3.2 Strengthen long-term scenario planning processes with appropriate risk assessments and counter-measures to ensure that suitable policies and procedures can be implemented to resolve and minimize issues in the event of unforeseen circumstances
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, project team 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
4. Recommendation:

Develop a robust M&E system at project level

R4: Developing a robust M&E system at project level
The UNDP DPRK CO should develop a robust M&E system at project level with effective monitoring and accountability mechanisms to: • collect and report real/reliable data during project implementation, including field implementation visits as follow up to programme field monitoring visits, in order to show the results achieved and the impact.
• continuously monitor and report in the project annual reports on the use of the assets and delivered items, after handover to project beneficiaries, to see the full operation/production in its entirety and also to determine the expected impact results.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 Strengthen the monitoring of operations of project supported facilities including the use of the assets and delivered items, after handover to project beneficiaries, and collection of reliable data, during project implementation visits in addition to program monitoring, in order to have evidence-based project results reporting and replication
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO program and project teams 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
5. Recommendation:

Develop and implement a Sustainable Production and Consumption Supply Chain e.g. for the Pistia and Spirulina production and wild fruits processing

 

The pilot projects in producing Pistia and Spirulina, together with the potential to produce wild fruits, have the potential to be replicated and upscaled to other provinces within DPRK to improve nutrition and food security. They further demonstrated the need for continuity to enable a complete agriculture/food supply chain for sustainable production and consumption.
In line with the UN SDG #12 (Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns) which significantly focuses on “operating on supply chain, involving everyone from producer to final consumer”6, it is recommended that: R5.1) future UNDP DPRK projects should develop and complete the full agriculture/food supply chain, incorporating climate change adaption/resilience capabilities to overcome severe climate change conditions, to upscale and fully commercialize the production of agricultural and food products for increased nutrition and food security in DPRK
R5.2) UNDP DPRK CO should facilitate knowledge/operational transfer of successful pilot projects (Pistia and Spirulina Centers as key examples) with procedural, operational and hands-on training manuals should be replicated in close partnership with National/Local Counterparts

Management Response: [Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1 Develop and complete the full agriculture/food supply chain for UNDP projects in such area, incorporating climate change adaption/resilience capabilities to overcome severe climate change conditions, to upscale and fully commercialize the production of agricultural and food products for increased nutrition and food security in DPRK
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, BRH 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
5.2 Facilitate knowledge/operational transfer of successful pilot initiatives (Pistia and Spirulina Centers as key examples) with procedural, operational and hands-on training manuals for wider replications in close partnership with national/local counterparts.
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, national and local counterparts 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
6. Recommendation:

Build capacity continuously in sustainable agriculture, farming and food production practices

To further improve nutrition and food security, any future projects in DPRK should continue to include capacity building activities at local county and village (Ri) levels such as developing and implementing: R6.1) foundational and advanced hands-on/practical courses in sustainable agriculture, farming and food production practices to overcome and adapt to severe climate change
R6.2) gender mainstreaming activities to assess the capacity needs according to gender requirements, and foundational and advanced hands-on/practical courses specifically relating to enhancing gender equality and improving the women’s living and livelihood standards
R6.3) train-the-trainer courses to transfer knowledge gained from the courses in R6.1 and R6.2 to national/local research institutes, technology and dissemination centres, and vocational skills training schools to increase the training impact in other provinces/counties in DPRK.
R6.4) study tours for increased exposure to acquiring knowledge in global trends and best practices in other countries of similar context and/or culture to DPRK

Management Response: [Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1 Develop and deliver foundation and advanced hands-on/practical courses in sustainable agriculture, farming and food production practices overcoming / adapting to severe climate change.
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, project team 2020/04 Completed Project closed History
6.2 Develop and deliver foundation and advanced hands-on/practical courses specifically relating to enhancing gender equality and improving the women’s living and livelihood standards.
[Added: 2019/11/21] [Last Updated: 2020/04/22]
CO, project team 2020/04 Completed Project closed History

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org